Delhi High Court
Anju Mahajan vs Nasir Ali & Ors (New India Assurance ... on 6 November, 2024
Author: Neena Bansal Krishna
Bench: Neena Bansal Krishna
$~12
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision:6th November, 2024
+ MAC.APP. 155/2018
ANJU MAHAJAN
.....Appellant
Through: Mr. Manish Mainee and Ms. Divya
Saini, Advocates.
versus
NASIR ALI & ORS (NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD)
.....Respondent
Through: Mr. J.P.N. Shahi, Advocate for the
Insurance Company.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
J U D G M E N T (oral)
CM APPL. 34886/2024 (under Section 151 CPC on behalf of the Appellant
for Directions)
1. Present Application has been filed on behalf of the Appellant for
necessary directions.
2. It is submitted that this Court vide final Judgment dated 05.12.2019
had enhanced the Compensation as granted vide Award dated 16.07.2016.
Considering that the Appellant had suffered 90% Permanent Disability of
the whole body with fracture dorso-lumbar spine with paraplegia with
balder/bowel involvement (0/5 power) fracture D-12 vertebra, Respondent
No. 3 was directed to make a wheel-chair available for life time to the
injured and the same included replacement or up gradation of the
wheelchair, as recorded in Paragraph 11 of the Judgment dated 05.12.2019,
3. The Appellant submits that the earlier wheel-chair, that was purchased
in 2018, needs replacement by a new automatic power wheel-chair and the
cost of the same is Rs.3,67,500/- as per the Quotation annexed with the
Application.
4. It is further submitted that as per Paragraph 14 and 15 of Judgment
dated 05.12.2019, Rs.5,40,000/- has been illegally deducted by the
Respondent/Insurance company towards T.D.S. (20% amount), despite the
PAN Card and ITR's of the Appellant being made available on record. The
amount deducted should have been only Rs.2,70,000/- i.e. 10% of the
amount as per Annexure-P2 filed with the Appeal. There is an illegal
deduction of Rs.2,70,000/- plus interest w.e.f 2017, which has resulted in
wrongful loss to the Appellant.
5. Thus, it is prayed that the Insurance Company be directed to release
the amount of purchase of new wheel-chair and also to refund Rs.2,70,000/-
with interest as has been wrongly deducted by way of T.D.S.
6. Learned Counsel on behalf of Insurance Company submits that
such open ended Directions to make the wheel-chair available without
specifying the time is not tenable under the law as the Supreme Court in
various judgments has deprecated this kind of open ended Orders. It is,
however, submitted that proper remedy would be followed by the Insurance
Company to seek the rectification/clarification on this aspect.
7. In respect of T.D.S. Certificate it is submitted that the amount already
stands deposited to the Income Tax Department and there is no reason for
the Insurance Company to be directed to pay the amount as claimed to have
been paid in excess by the Appellant.
8. Submissions heard and record perused.
9. The Claimant/Appellant has been held entitled to up-gradation of the
wheel-chair. The Brochure/Catalogue of the wheel-chair along with the
Quotation of the cost has been placed along with the Application.
10. The Insurance Company shall verify the Cost Quotation/Provisional
Invoice and shall make the payment directly in respect of the purchase of the
wheel-chair of the same model, to this vendor or any other vendor who may
be providing the wheel-chair at lesser amount, within six weeks, under
intimation to the Petitioner/Claimant.
11. In so far as the refund of TDS is concerned, the Appellant is at liberty
to pursue appropriate remedy for refund of the excess T.D.S. paid to the
Income Tax Department.
12. It is further clarified that these kind of Applications which are in the
nature of execution or seeking execution/implementation of any part of the
Award/Order, may henceforth be filed before the learned Tribunal.
13. The application stands disposed of.
(NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA)
JUDGE
NOVEMBER 6, 2024
va
